Cyprus-Forum.com

[Simon]

Yes, ok

That is why it lasted so long, because Makarios and Cypriots in general really wanted that agreement. We didn't even negotiate it nor did Cypriots vote for it in a referendum. But in no way was it forced upon us!

[free_cyprus]

well im getting mixed messages here it was not negotited by cypriots but by greece and turkey and britain soooooo we cypriots had no say in the matter

[free_cyprus]

sooo all we have is what they said we could have and how we could have it...................... cypriots had no say in their own independence and soooo called self determination

[free_cyprus]

cypezokyli
once again :
this document was NOT forced on us.
greece and turkey negotiated for us, and reached an agreement.
makarios was informed and agreed to all significant points of the agreements. the objections he raised in london wouldnt have affected the core of the agreement.

either it was forced on us or cypriots drew up the document for is in the best interest of cypriot people for self ditermination .................... but now your telling me turkey and greece negotiated the treaty.............................the main question asked in this thread is ........................is this document just and legal and does it benefit the cypriot people..............................................i havent even gone into the shameful demand made by turkey and greece in this document

[cypezokyli]

Yes, ok

That is why it lasted so long, because Makarios and Cypriots in general really wanted that agreement. We didn't even negotiate it nor did Cypriots vote for it in a referendum. But in no way was it forced upon us!

suddenly you remembered "cypriots" ?
our mama negotiate for us.
we wanted to unite with our mama remember ?
since for so long people argued that we had a right to unite with greece, i find it amazing that they complain when greece negotiates for them!!!!

the fact that is did not last long, has nothing to do with the fact, that it was a negotiated agreement. the one doesnot exclude the other. based on what do you reach such conclusions ? !!!!!

[cypezokyli]

either it was forced on us or cypriots drew up the document for is in the best interest of cypriot people for self ditermination .................... but now your telling me turkey and greece negotiated the treaty.............................the main question asked in this thread is ........................is this document just and legal and does it benefit the cypriot people..............................................i havent even gone into the shameful demand made by turkey and greece in this document

the cypriots didnot drow up the document. but they were kept informed and agreed to most of the parts. but let me remind you once again, that at the time nobody felt that cypriots even existed (with the exception of the british perhaps)

is the document legal ? ofcource it is!!! when you put your signiture its ofcource legal. can you imagine what chanses we would ever had after the invasion had the document not been legal ?

just ? is a whole different question. just and legal are 2 diffrent things.

when we ask such questions , one has always to think about what the alternative was. and the alternative was partition (only some idiots thought that enosis, was achievable, and the managed exactly to bring the only other real alternative - partition )


you cannot judge such agreement without viewing the realistic alternatives.

[Jerry]

Yes, ok

That is why it lasted so long, because Makarios and Cypriots in general really wanted that agreement. We didn't even negotiate it nor did Cypriots vote for it in a referendum. But in no way was it forced upon us!

suddenly you remembered "cypriots" ?
our mama negotiate for us.
we wanted to unite with our mama remember ?
since for so long people argued that we had a right to unite with greece, i find it amazing that they complain when greece negotiates for them!!!!

the fact that is did not last long, has nothing to do with the fact, that it was a negotiated agreement. the one doesnot exclude the other. based on what do you reach such conclusions ? !!!!!

My recollection is that Makarios was told by the UK "accept or face partition" - Hardly a free choice! The Zurich agreement was a poisoned chalice, it was doomed to failure because of the animosity between the communities in the 50s. The biggest mistake was to turn down the earlier proposal whereby Cyprus would be self governing but under British rule, a sort of semi independence which could have led to better things if the two sides had cooperated.

[free_cyprus]

cypezokyli
i dont know if you read that the zurich agreement and if you did you definatly did not understand anything in that document for if you did i would not have got the answer i got back from you.................. but thats ok not a problem

[Simon]

Cype,

Do you even believe what you write? I find it laughable. Did Makarios really have a choice but to accept? Did GCs? We all know what GCs wanted, you have stated that clearly above, so why were they given the 1960 Agreement, without even a referendum? Nobody thought Cypriots existed you say? And yet, at the same time, you say we agreed to the 1960 Agreement, which established the 'Cypriot' nationality and the 'Cypriot' citizen.

[quote]suddenly you remembered "cypriots" ?
our mama negotiate for us.
we wanted to unite with our mama remember ?
since for so long people argued that we had a right to unite with greece, i find it amazing that they complain when greece negotiates for them!!!! [/quote]

None of this effects or contradicts anything I have said. You are just repeating yourself. If GCs did not get their wish of uniting with Greece, and were to be given independence instead, then surely it is for us to negotiate that independence, not Greece. You can't have it both ways. It is really not that difficult Cype If you cannot even see the duress GCs were under to agree with that 1960 Agreement, then there is nothing else to say.

[quote]the fact that is did not last long, has nothing to do with the fact, that it was a negotiated agreement. the one doesnot exclude the other. based on what do you reach such conclusions [/quote]

What it shows, is that GCs (the majority) were not happy with the Agreements. Maybe this is the result of us not negotiating it and agreeing to it under duress? I did not say it wasn't a negotiated settlement, another one of your typical assumptions; what I am saying is, it was an unfair and poorly negotiated settlement that was agreed under conditions which inevitably doomed it to failure.

[free_cyprus]

cypezokyli
you wrote
but let me remind you once again, that at the time nobody felt that cypriots even existed (with the exception of the british perhaps


i see and yet these three great powers in the height of their empires decided to make cyprus part of their empire when it meant nothing and it did not exist ......................................cyprus has always existed in fact cypriots were known as christians and muslims not greeks and turks or turkish cypriots or greek cypriots................. turkish and greek cypriots was coined by britain not cypriots